About your Search

20130201
20130228
STATION
CSPAN 3
CSPAN2 2
KGO (ABC) 1
MSNBC 1
MSNBCW 1
WJLA (ABC) 1
WMAR (ABC) 1
LANGUAGE
English 17
Search Results 0 to 16 of about 17 (some duplicates have been removed)
, they call it on harry reid and a famous pianist tries to get old creatures to act young again. the grapevine is next. ♪ ♪ >>. >> chris: and now fresh picking from the political grapevine. fact check.org found harry reid was wrong by claiming, quote. that the american people need to understand it's nothing not as if we have done nothing for the debt. $2.6 trillion already we've made in cuts. all those cuts have come from non-defense programs. the fact check organization says only $1.4 trillion have the deficit reduction was in spending cuts. the rest came from tax hikes. >>> a seven-year-old colorado boy has been suspended from cool for lobbing an imaginary grenade in order to save the planet. he did not threaten anyone but violated the school's list of absolutes which forbids weapons real or pretend. his mother doesn't think it's realistic important second graders but the school district tells the herald newspaper the story is more complicated than being portrayed. >> finally as the associated press puts it, no wonder they are in danger. galapagos for advertises aluminum period around wh
. >> that is classic harry reid. he said that when why do something he doesn't like. if we agreed to everything he wanted to do he might be happy. nevertheless, this is a serious situation when you talk about a secretary of defense. this is the most important choice a president can make. i think he's made a choice even democrats scratching their head and they were embarrassed also about the performance, unacceptable performance of chuck hagel before the armed services committee . i think it deserves at least a little time to continue to look at what his position and going and leadership he can or can't provide. i don't know what the democratics will circle the wagon and support the president. but many of them have real concerns over whether it a good choice. >> we'll see if they go public with those. senator dan coats, for your time. >> thank you. >> pakistani officials called a deadly bombing a failure of security and intelligence agencies. security official it is did not act because they are scared of what the terrorist may do to them. 81 people were kim 61 others were injured. a mass funeral is
votes will be problems for harry reid and the senate? these are issues that are going to come over here at some point. don't you -- hold up the process if he's having trouble on these tough issues? >> the legislative process was designed to be inefficient and difficult. so that if congress were able to move a bill through both houses and could agree upon a bill, it would actually become a law. so at the start of every session there are always a number of issues that carry over from the prior session. and frankly there's a lot of scar tissue that carries over with a lot of these bills. it's up to congress to figure out where the common ground is and how to deal with it. let me make clear i don't like the sequester. i think it's taking a meat ax to our government. meat ax to many programs and will weaken our national defense. that's why i fought to not have the sequester in the first place. but the president didn't want to have to deal with the debt limit again before his re-election. it was the president and senate democrats who committed to working with us to get an outcome out of the s
, it starts in the senate and we'll see what harry reid can get done. most of the key players, nra ratings including the majority leader, chairman leahy, six democrats up in states that the president got 42% or less in. i don't think they'll be too enamored with him, so i think that pushes you toward things like background checks and the house, it's going to be tougher. i mean that's just the reality of it politically. so i would expect something to be done. i think there's going to be a lot of hearings but probably more in the mental health area, potentially in some of the background check areas, but anything that hints towards national regs won't make it and anything that really materially makes it more difficult for people to exercise second amendment rights won't happen. >> i tell you, i don't agree. i hope that -- i think the odds of something happening are determined by the determination of people who push those things. and when the folks are going to be joining me and jim langevin, we don't want to take the rights of owning a gun away. i own a gun myself, but i do believe when you h
to lead harry reid. look, we've tried 60 ways to sundown and, you know, i don't know what they got going on over at the senate, but i wish they would get together with the president, pass what they think they can pass, and then we would be glad to take a look at it. we've certainly shown -- >> you know as well as i do they're not going to be able to pass anything with 60 votes. they may be able to pass some things with 50, 52, 53 votes. they won't be able to pass anything with 60 votes, and should that be the marker on something like this? is this such an important -- >> for sure. >> -- thing it should take 60? that 41 -- >> no. i'm saying what should be the marker is the senate ought to be able to pass something. look, for better or for worse, the president -- >> so senate republicans need to get involved in this? >> no, what i'm saying is they need to work it out over there. i'm not going to tell the senate how to do their business, but they -- where br they start looking for us to lead them we've passesed two bills. the president passes nothing. the president's party controls the sena
that a cabinet secretary needed 60 votes and both of those bush nominees facing harry reid and democrats and environmental agency head. both had to meet 60 vote threshold. now it has happened to hagel. the third time in ten years. so it's not unprecedented. my question to you, why rush it? >> because the department of defense is responsible for our military. we are currently in conflict right now. i think this is something that has to deal with national security. you really need to get serious and get to work here. we can't be talking about things that are not relevant. they are asking for information about benghazi and chuck hagel had nothing to do with benghazi. if you wanted questions about that you need to talk on other people. >> heather: they got one of those questions answered, that is whether or not president obama himself personally called libyan officials on the night of september 11th but the respect on hagel to get a simple answer which we now know the answer was no. brad? >> you are absolutely right. we had some leverage over the white house and hagel was used at that levera
a balanced budget amendment the kind of things that endear people in the republican primary voter. and harry reid spent more money than any of the other candidates in order to get the weakest republican into the general election knowing that they had a very difficult uphill fight in missouri and sure enough they got the weakest candidate and he blew himself up with the infamous current about illegitimate rape. >> you say it is to put in more quote electable candidates. the conservative wing of the republican party says the most eledgable is the most moderate and that is not necessarily the people they want to see running for office. >> lock, look, looking, look, look, look, let's be clear about this. cross roads support for tea party candidates. we are the largest financial backers of tea party candidates for the senate and the house. we spent over $30 million for tea party senate candidate. over $25 million for house candidates. $2.9 million for marco rubio. more than any other group in the general election. $2.7 million for rand paul. $8 million in colorado for ken buck. $5.1 million in ne
have barack obama who is a democrat, president of the united states. then we have harry reid who is the majority leader. so the democrats are in control of both. now, if you think back at what happened back in -- during the last bush administration, we had exactly the reverse. george bush was president of the united states and the democrats were a minority. same situation. so what happened? first of all, we had bolton come up, john bolton. same thing, subjected to a 60-vote margin. we had steve -- dirk kempthorne. all remember dirk kempthorne. there are a lot of people who did not approve of him. he was appointed by bush, a republican, and then when he came over here, the democrats didn't like him, they subjected him to a 60-vote margin. that wasn't a filibuster. this isn't a filibuster today. people are trying to say that and blame me as being the bad guy that's causing a filibuster. it's not the case at all. any more than it was the case back in the 2005-2006 and other times when we had a nominee that was put forth by president bush. it was objected to by the democrats. now, di
's the interesting thing. if you look today we have barack obama, democrat president of the united states. and harry reid the majority leader. and the democrats are in control of both. if you think back at what happened back in during the last bush administration, we had exactly the reverse. george bush was president of the united states, and the democrats were the minority. same situation. so what happened? first of all, we had both come up. john bolton same thing. subjected to a 60-vote margin. we had steve -- we remember dirk, there a lot of people that it not approve of him. he was appointed by bush, a republican, and then when he came over here the democrats didn't like him. they subjected him to a 60-vote margin. that wasn't a filibuster. it's not a filibuster today. people are trying to blame me the bad guy causing a filibuster. it's not the case at all. it anymore the case than the 2005, 2006, and other times when we had a nominee put forth by president wush who was objected to by the democrat. dirk when he was nominated to be the secretary of entire job, there was a lot of opposition to the
? >> yes. >> yes. thank you, senator. as i understand it on october 2, 2008, majority leader harry reid brought a similar bill to the floor. in fact, it was called the comprehensive iran sanctions accountability act of 2008. and he brought it to the floor in october 2, 2008. there have been media reports that you blocked unanimous consent for the consideration of that bill. are those reports true or not? >> i was one of some republican senators that did not want that vote to go forward. i voted against it in subcommittee. and the reason i did was because the bush administration did not want that bill to go forward. the reason they didn't was because they were involved in negotiations with the russians and the u.n. and security council members to put multilateral sanctions through. >> but just to be clear you did block unanimous contestant. >> i was -- con sent in >> i was part of those who did. >> would it surprise you that an earlier version of those sanctions bill was actually co- sponsored bicek taxpayer cary and clinton and obama at the time? would that surprise you? >> no. not nece
. the president has a proposal. i don't think it does sound, but let's vote on it. to harry reid, the house, it has decided on sequestration the past year we have done nothing in the senate. we are not doing anything in the senate. so, harry, please take the president's proposal or come up with one of your own. put it on the floor and let's start voting. we have our fingerprint as republicans on this sequestration idea. it was the president's idea that we come as the republican party agreed to it. we got in this mess together and we will have to get out together. mr. president, helped lead us. all like anyone else on this stage, you are the commander-in- chief. do you really want your legacy to be that you let the american congress into a deal that would destroy the military at the time it would need it the most? do you want to pivot to asia? how do you do that with 232 ships? when about iran acquiring nuclear capabilities? have you modernize the f-16 and the f-18? had you go deep into iran without the f-22 and the at-35 coming into being? our enemy would love this to happen here i'm sure i
Search Results 0 to 16 of about 17 (some duplicates have been removed)